From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:57422 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937853AbXGMWy1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:54:27 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:54:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/7] Sparsemem Virtual Memmap V5 In-Reply-To: <617E1C2C70743745A92448908E030B2A01EA65B9@scsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <617E1C2C70743745A92448908E030B2A01EA65B9@scsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft , Nick Piggin , Mel Gorman List-ID: On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Luck, Tony wrote: > > How many tests were done and on what platform? > > Andy's part 0/7 post starts off with the performance numbers. He > didn't say which ia64 platform was used for the tests. > > Looking my logs for the last few kernel builds (some built on a > tiger_defconfig kernel which uses CONFIG_VIRTUAL_MEM_MAP=y, and > some with the new CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP) I'd have a tough time > saying whether there was a regression or not). I'd be very surprised if there is any difference because the IA64 code for virtual memmap is the source of ideas and implementation for SPARSE_VIRTUAL.